The metrical psalter of King James VI and its connection with the one presently in use. Part II

».

:.4;

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING

JAMES VI

AND ITS CONNECTION WITH THE ONE
PRESENTLY IN USE

By the Rev. Wm. McMillan, Ph.D., D.D.

PART II

The Psalter like the Service Book is a well printed volume. The pages in
my copy are about ten and a half inches in height. ^ The text of the Psalms
is in black letter, with Roman for the other portions. It is difficult to say
how many copies still exist. The late Dr. Christie, minister of St. Andrew’s
Church, Edinburgh, estimated that about a hundred copies of the Service
Book (Laud’s Liturgy) were in existence in 1937 ; but many of these lack
the metrical Psalter, and I have yet to come across a single copy of the
latter which has not been bound up with the Service Book. The printing
has been well done and I have noticed only one misprint : “with” for
“wish” in the 50th Psalm, verse 9. The verses are printed double, that is,
what would be eight lines in our Psalter is printed as four in King James.
Thus Psalm iv, verse 3, in our version is printed as follows :

But know, that for himself the Lord
the godly man doth choose :

The Lord, when I on him do call,
to hear will not refuse.

In King James :

But know that for himself, the Lord, the godly man selects,
and when to him I humbly call, he never me neglects.

It will be noticed that in our version the first and third Hnes begin
with a capital letter, indicating that the fuU line is one of fourteen syllables.
In King James the first letter in the full verse is the one which is so marked.

1 The copy of the Service Book in the possession of the writer was purchased
while he was serving with the Army in England in 1941, and was used by him at
several united services there. It must have been one of the first to be printed, as the
page containing Psalm 109 (Prose Psalter) is “ inset.” It bears the Royal Arms of
King Charles on the cover and may have been meant for use in the Chapel Royal.
It is the only copy known to have the collection of “ Certaine Prayers ’’ following
the Psalms.

184

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

185

and though quite a number of other words have capitals, pronouns relating
to the Almighty are printed without them, as is the case in the version we
still use.

As we all know there are duplicates in the Psalter and it may not be
out of place to see how our translators dealt with them. Psalms 14 and 53
are practically identical in the prose version, except for one verse. 1 In
the 1650 metrical version three of the verses are exactly alike in each ;
but there are differences in the others. 2 In King James, the first two verses
are alike in each, and in the yth verse the only change is from “thine”
in the 14th to “thy” in the 53rd.

The last five verses of the 40th Psalm are the same as those which com-
pose the 70th ; but neither in our present Psalter nor in that of King
James are the metrical versions the same.^ The io8th Psalm is made up
of the last five verses of the 57th and the last eight of the both. Of the
verses taken from the 57th not one is reproduced in our present book ;
but those from the both are given with only minor differences.^ Thus the
lines from the both,

“ O God, which hadest us cast off
this thing wilt thou not do ? ”

become in the io8th,

“ O God, thou who hadst cast us off
this thing wilt thou not do ? ”

In King James, on the other hand, all are different, except the 7th and
8th verses of the io8th which correspond exactly to the bth and 7th
verses of the both.s An interesting problem arises with regard to the 70th

1 Verse 5 in Psalm 53 is quite different from verses 5 and 6 in Psalm 14.

* There are 24 lines in the 14th Psalm and 28 lines in the 53rd.

3 In the Reformation Psalter the 40th Psalm is in common metre and the 70th
in long. The two versions are quite different.

* In the Reformation Psalter, there is little similarity in the metrical versions of
these Psalms.

5 In the case of “ King James his book ” the differences may be due to the fact
that there were two persons, the King and Alexander, engaged in the work of versify-
ing, and in the present Psalter the differences may be due to the various revisions
which the work had to undergo before it was finally adopted. In 1647 the General
Assembly appointed John Adamson, Principal of Edinburgh University, Thomas
Crawford, Professor in the same College, John Row, afterwards Principal of King’s
College, Aberdeen, and John Nevay, minister at Loudon, who was banished after the
restoration, to revise “ Rowe’s Paraphrase.” Each of the first three was to revise
forty Psalms and the last thirty. It will be seen that no two of the “duplicate”
Psalms were dealt with by the same reviser. In 1648 Adamson and Crawford were
asked by the Assembly “to revise the labours of Mr. Zachary Boyd upon the other
Scripturall Songs,” it being the intention to add some of these to the Psalter ; but
nothing seems to have been done in that direction. Adamson was a minister, having
been ordained to Liberton in 1609. Crawford was a layman and, according to a
contemporary, ‘ ‘was profoundly skilled in theology and a man of the greatest piety and
integrity.” These two must have had the confidence of their colleagues, for they were
chosen to represent Edinburgh at a conference of the Universities of Scotland in 1648.

186

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

Psalm. In our present Psalter the first version is in short metre and there
is “Another of the same” in common metre. ’ In the Reformation Psalter
this Psalm is in long metre, but in King James it is in short, and there
need be no doubt that it was the royal book which suggested the short
metre form in ours, though only two of the sixteen lines which make up
the Psalm are the same in both books. This portion of the Psalter was
revised, as has been said by Thomas Crawford2 (in all probability an Elder
of the Church), the only layman on the committee of revision, and he
may have been responsible for the short metre version. He was a Professor
in the University of Edinburgh of which he wrote a history.^ In this he
refers to King James as a “happy peaceable Prince, of which those who
survived him were the more sensible in respect of the woful tragedies
acted upon these lands after his removal.” We are probably not far wrong
in assuming that the Professor’s regard for the King was extended to the
King’s Psalter. He died a “venerable man” in 1662.

One of the first things which strikes the reader is that the 1636 Psalter
offers a much larger selection of singable psalms than does the Reformation
Psalter, which it was meant to displace. The older book had no fewer
than thirty-eight different forms of metre and many of these were such
that it must have been difficult for the ordinary worshipper to memorise
them. It has to be remembered that the Scots like the English were to a
considerable extent an unlettered people, and it seems quite evident that
few of the peculiars could have been in regular use in ordinary congrega-
tions. As these formed a large proportion of the whole, the result was that
much of the Psalter was neglected. Doubtless it was this, as much as
anything else, which led the General Assembly in 1648 to insist that every
psalm should appear in a common metre version, though there might be

1 There are five short metre Psalms in our present collection. Of these the 25th
and 45th were in the same form in the Reformation Psalter.

^ Crawford appears to have been a most remarkable man and, as no particulars
of him appear in any of our Scottish Church histories, a few notes maj’^ not be out
of place. He matriculated at St. Leonard’s College, St. Andrews, in 1618, and
graduated there in 1621. Four years later he was a candidate for a Professorship of
Philosophy at Edinburgh. He was not successful; but in 1626 he was elected Pro-
fessor of Humanity there, in place of Samuel Rutherford who had to leave, “having
incurred some scandal on account of an irregular marriage.” In 1630 he resigned his
chair to become Rector of Edinburgh High School, an office he held to 1 640, when he
returned to the University as Professor of Philosophy and also Professor of Mathe-
matics. A later historian of the University (Professor Dalziel) describes him as
“one of the most laborious, successful and celebrated teachers who ever appeared in
this University” [History, II, 188). Among other things he did for the College was
the designing of the lettering to be put “upon the board of Benefactors.” This was
in 1658. In 1633, along with Principal Adamson and William Drummond of Haw-
thornden, he arranged the ceremonial to be observed at the visit of Charles I to the
City of Edinburgh. He wrote a Latin Grammar which seems to have been in wide
use, and also “Notes and Observations on Mr. George Buchanan’s History of Scot-
land,” which was published in 1708.

3 This was not published until 1808.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

187

another in long, short or peculiar metre. Hence it is that to-day we have
a hundred and fifty common metre Psalms in our Psalter.*

King James, judging from what he left in MS., had a liking for
“ peculiars,” and we have to remember that in the churches and chapels
where he worshipped the standard of musical culture was probably much
higher than in the generality of congregations. Alexander, however,
wisely dispensed to a great extent with peculiars. There are only ten
different metres in his book including long, common and short.

We have to keep in mind that the new book was meant for use in
England and Ireland as well as in Scotland, and the old Anglican Psalter
had only fifteen forms of metre. South of the Tweed Psalm singing was at
a low ebb and common metre tunes seem to have been the only ones in
regular use. 2 These things doubtless played their part in persuading
Alexander to cut down the metrical forms so drastically. In his book
there are 159 Psalm versions, nine of them Psalms having what he calls
“Another of the same,” a phrase transferred to our Psalter. In our
present book there are 163 Psalm versions. We have the whole 150 in
common metre. There are four Psalms in long metre. Nos. 6, 100, 102
and 145, the last three of which appear in this form in the Reformation
Psalter. 3 In King James there are only two. Nos. 51 and 100. Then in
our present book we have five in short metre. Nos. 25, 45, 50, 67 and 70.
In King James there are three. Nos. 25, 70 and 134, the last having only
eight lines."* These have all left their mark on the version we still use.

,1 How seldom, if ever, is the second version of the hundredth psalm sung, or the
first version of the hundred and twenty-fourth.

2 It must not be thought that things were always better in Scotland. In a
pamphlet published in 1653, entitled "Causes of the Lord's Wrath,” it is stated that
one of these “Causes” is the fact that many who attend church do not take any
interest in the singing of the Psalms. Writing in 1881 the Rev. William Milroy
(1831-1893), minister of the (former) Reformed Presbyterian Church, Penpont,
mentions that preaching in a city church he gave out part of the long metre version
of the 102nd Psalm. “The precentor, rising and looking grimly over the pulpit
book-board, said, ‘ I canna sing lang metre.’ ” The date is not given ; but was
after 1862, when Mr. MUroy was admitted as a licentiate by the Synod. — Scotch
Communion Services, xxii.

3 The long metre version of the 102 nd Psalm is interesting, in that it was turned
into this form by Mr. J ohn Row who revised this section of the Psalter at the request
of the General Assembly. He took William Barton’s version in common metre and
added two syllables to every second line. It requires no great skill to detect the
insertions. Barton complained with some bitterness of the “piracies of the Scots.”
He was so annoyed that he wrote an entirely new version of the Psalm for his Psalter.

* The short metre version of the 70th Psalm in our book may possibly be from
the pen of Professor Crawford, above mentioned. It is a remarkable fact that of its
sixteen lines, twelve are exactly the same as the corresponding lines of the common
metre version, the second, third and fourth lines of each verse. The first lines in the
second version have, of course, eight syllables while those of the first have only six
each ; but the “subtractions” are easily “spotted.” The first line of the Psalm is
somewhat differently rendered in the two versions.

188

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

Then we have four “peculiars” in our present Psalter, Nos. 124, 136, 143
and 148, which appear in similar, though not identical forms in the
Reformation Psalter. Nos. 136 and 148 are in the same metre. As has
been said. King James seems to have had a special liking for “peculiars”
and eleven are given in the 1636 book : Nos. 50, in, 112, 113, 120, 121,
122, 124, 127, 136 and 148. Of these the two last and the 124th are in the
same metres as in our present Psalter and the whole eleven are in similar
metres in the Reformation version. It is worth while noticing that with
the exception of the 50th all the peculiars in King James are to be found
in the last forty Psalms and that there is “Another of the same” attached
to all except the 136th and 148th.!

The 50th Psalm is in a stanza of six lines of which the first four have
ten syllables and the last two eleven, the rhymes being a, a; b,b; c,c.
The rhyme in the last two lines is always on the penultimate syllable,
dearly clearly, brother mother, mountains fountains. The iiith and
I20th have stanzas of twelve lines, each of six syllables and rhyming
a, a ; b, c, c, b ; d, d ; f, e, e, f. The 112th, 113th and 127th are in six-
line stanzas each line having eight syllables. In the first the rhyme is
a, b; a, b; c, c; and in the other two, a, a; b, c, c, b. The 121st and the
122nd have also stanzas of six lines. These are arranged 668,668 ; but
the rhyming is different in the two psalms, the first being a, b, b, c, c;
the other a, a,b, c, c, b. The second version of the 124th Psalm in King
James is reproduced in our present book as the first version with but
little alteration. The second version of the looth Psalm in our book is
sometimes ascribed to Zachary Boyd ; but his lines owe a good deal to
the Psalter of 1636.

The tunes in the book number thirty-six and are given without har-
monies. Almost every Psalm has either a tune for itself, or a note indicat-
ing where a suitable tune is to be found. There is only one ordinary long
metre tune in the book, that is the “Old Hundredth.” The tune, attached
to the 51st Psalm is in double long metre, that attached to the 25th
Psalm is in double short metre, and all the others except those attached
to “peculiars” are in double common metre.

Most, if not all, of the tunes have been taken from older Psalters^
and some of them are quite well known to-day, as for example, the Old
44th (D.C.M.), the Old looth (L.M.) and the Old 124th (P.M.). Others
which have found a place in modern psalters and hymn books are the
Old i8th (D.C.M.), Old 25th (D.S.M.), Old 50th (P.M.), Old 8ist (D.C.M.)

^ It may have been thought that these were so well known that it was not
necessary to provide alternative versions.

2 Many of these tunes with harmonies will be found in the reprints of the Scots
Reformation Psalter (1635) already mentioned.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

189

and Old 137th (D.C.M.). Once or twice there is a “slip up” in the matter
of tunes. Thus, the 136th has the note, “Sing this as the 148th Psalm” ;
but when we turn to the latter we find that there is no tune there. The
same can be said of the iiith, which is to be sung as the 120th, though
the latter is tuneless. There is no direction at all attached to the 134th
Psalm ; though there is only one tune in the book suitable for its short
metre, that appended to the 25th Psalm.

A certain amount of obscurity attaches to the direction to sing Psalm
56 “as the Lamentation.” The “Lamentation” was a hymn which had
appeared in the Old Reformation Psalter. It may have been intended to
include it in this book, but if so the intention was not carried out.* In
the old Psalter, however, “The Lamentation” is in long metre, whereas
Psalm 56 in King James is in common. The 70th Psalm, which is in short
metre in King James, has the direction, “ Sing this as the 30th Psalm.”
It is to be hoped that this was never done as the 30th is in common metre.
Another error may be due to a misprint. This is the direction to sing
the both Psalm (common) as the 50th (peculiar). Probably 30th is meant.

One of the chief features of the 1636 Psalter, and one which might have
been copied in ours with advantage, is the division of the longer Psalms
into “singable” portions. These portions usually run to four or five
double verses,^ recalling the words of Burns in “The Ordination,”

‘‘O’ double verse come gie us fower
An’ skirl up the Bangor*”

Similar divisions appeared in the English Reformation Psalter, though
not in the Scottish one. Rous introduced them into his Psalter, as did
Tate and Brady at a later date.

The division in King James is not the same in every Psalm. Thus the
37th has four sections each with five stanzas, while the 55th has three
sections each of four. The 39th, with seven and a half stanzas, is divided
into two, while the 31st which has twelve, and the 88th which has eleven,
are not divided at all. The 94th is unequally divided into two portions
of five and seven stanzas to fit the sense ; but there are others where the
division appears to have been made mechanically, there being no attempt
to divide according to the meaning. Thus, the 89th Psalm has the division

1 It has already been said that in the MS book left by King James there is a
version of “The Lamentation.”

2 All available evidence points to the fact that larger portions of the Psalter
were sung in the 17th and i8th centuries than is the case to-day. In the Book of
Common Order it is directed that on the occasion of a General Fast, the 51st Psalm
“shall be sung whole at the Morning Service and the 6th Psalm at the Afternoon
Service.” Patrick Walker tells that Alexander Peden, the well known Covenanting
minister, while officiating at a house conventicle first read over the 59th Psalm and
then with the congregation sang through the whole seventeen verses.

190

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

between the second and third parts at verse i6, though verse 17 is needed
to complete the sense of what has gone before.

Another thing which should be noticed is that, especially in the first
part of the Psalter, almost every verse in the prose has a corresponding
verse in the metrical. 1 In our present book it is no uncommon thing to
find two verses of the original being compressed into one. For example,
the eight verses of the 121st Psalm are reduced to four in our version.
But, while this compression is not unknown in King James, it is not by
any means so often resorted to as in ours. Thus, the i8th Psalm, which
has fifty verses in the original, has also fifty in King James, but only
forty-two in ours. It is interesting to observe how the compilers of the
1650 Psalter have followed the earlier one in manipulating the lines of
the 119th Psalm, in order to have three double verses of common metre
in each portion.

Occasionally there is a slip in the numbering. Thus the 22nd (last)
verse of the 38th Psalm is not numbered at all, though it appears as,
“Make haste O Lord to give me help, who my salvation art.” More often
we find an extra verse. Thus in the 40th Psalm, the second half of the
tenth verse appears as the eleventh, and from there to the end the numbers
are wrong. In the 53rd Psalm, the fifth and sixth verses (last two) are
expanded to four in the metrical psalm, the last verse being numbered
eight. Psalm 90 is given an extra verse (the tenth being expanded to form
both the tenth and eleventh) and so are several others.

Reference has been made to the objection that there were a number of
words in this Psalter which could not be understood by the people as a
whole. Many of these were removed, but some were allowed to remain.
Among these were “ obloquie ” (Ps. 22, 6), “ torrents ” (Ps. 69, 24),
“ bUlows ” (Ps. 42, 8). The objectors had evidently forgotten that the
last of these was to be found in the prose. In addition, there were other
words left in which could not have been well known to the ordinary man
in the 17th century. ‘ Imperial,” “eminent,” “antiquity,” “impor-
tuned ” and “ oracle ” (meaning “ sacred place ” ) are examples.

The versifier has also used terms we do not usually associate with
Holy Scripture; such as “mutiny” (Ps. 83, 2), “dive” (Ps. 26, 2),
“knotty” meaning “rugged” (Ps. 68, 16), “butte” meaning “re-
proach ” (Ps. 79, 4), “ artificial ” (Ps. 135, 17), “ gallants ” (Ps. 148, 12),
“ prodigious ” (Ps. 106, 39), “ suter,”2 and many others. One word the

1 The 20th verse of the 72 nd Psalm in the prose version does not appear in our
present metrical Psalter at all. In King James it appears not as a verse, but as a
rubric, in this form. “The Prayers of David the sonne of Jesse are ended.”

2 For suitor, in the sense of petitioner. Probably by many it would be con-
sidered as meaning a shoemaker. The word is found in Ps. 14, 2 and in Ps. 53, 2.
" Town,” a word not found in the prose of the Psalter at all, appears in the metrical
version of Psalm 127.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

191

writer seems to have been specially fond of is “straight” which is intro-
duced into quite a number of Psalms. Thus Psalm 30, 7 :

“ But when thou once didst hide thy face,
it straight did trouble me,”

or the 95th ;

“ O come and let us worship straight. ”1

We find too the word “league” used where the prose has “ covenant.”
This is not due to any distaste for the latter word, which had not any
sinister meaning for royalists when this version was first penned, and we
find it in other psalms.

We have seen how Calderwood attacked the 1631 edition because of its
“ poetical conceits.” These were not all removed from the later edition,
as the following examples show ;

“ Soft pearls of quickening showers ” (Psalm 72, 7).

“ The feathered bands that fan the air ” (Psalm 104, 12).

“ We in an extasie entranced ” (Psalm 126, i).

Occasionally we find that the versifier has not been afraid to make
his own translation from the Hebrew. Thus, in Psalm 42 where our
Psalter has “ ev’n from Mizar hill,” as it is in the prose of the authorised
version, the older Psalter has “ from the httle hill.”

There are a few out-of-date words such as “parcell” in the sense of
small portion (Ps. 38, 7). “Whereas” is used fairly often where we would
use “where’er.” “Presume” in the sense of “presumptuous” in Psalm
30, 6. In a Psalter, prepared by Scots, we might have expected some
Scots words or phrases. These are however very few. “Earst” in the
sense of “early” occurs several times. “Targe” is used for “shield” in
Psalm 91. “ Into,” still used in Fife in the sense of “ in,” has this mean-
ing in Psalm 23, “ Into the paths of righteousness,” and in the 127th
Psalm, “ But they shall speak into the gate.” In the MS psalms which
King James left there are, as has been said, quite a number of Scottish
words ; but these have been carefully excluded from the printed editions.

We pass now to deal with the connection of the Psalter of King James
with that presently in use in the Church of Scotland. When in 1647 the
General Assembly appointed four persons, three ministers and a layman,
to examine and amend the Metrical Psalter of Francis Rous (which had
already been subjected to an exhaustive revision by a committee of the
Westminster Divines), the Court recommended the four brethren “to
make use of the travels of Rowallan, Master Zachary Boyd or of any other

^ “Straight” has been introduced to the first verse of the ngth Psalm in our
version, though it does not appear in the prose.

192

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

on that subject ; but especially of our own Paraphrase (Reformation
Psalter), that what they find better in any of these works may be chosen.”
It will be noticed that they did not mention “ King James his version ” ;
but it is a somewhat remarkable fact that more was incorporated into the
new book from it than from two, if not from all three, of those which were
mentioned.

Many years ago the late Dr. Rorison, Minister of Dalserf, made an
interesting analysis of our present Psalter, with a view to tracing every
line to its source. * There are just over 9,000 lines (there are about 500
more in King James), and Dr. Rorison succeeded in tracing close on five
thousand of these. He identified 338 as being from the Reformation
Psalters, English and Scottish, 49 as being from Mure of Rowallan, 516
from King James and 754 from Zachary Boyd. He is wrong in the case
of Mure of Rowallan, whose contribution was somewhat greater than he
makes it out to be. I, too, have made an examination of our present
Psalter, and my calculations show that 572 lines are taken from King
James, of which by far the greater number are in both editions, though
24 lines are to be found in the 1631 edition only. This would seem to
indicate that both editions were in the hands of the later revisers. This
difference in calculation between Dr. Rorison and myself is due in part
to the fact that, where the change is from “my” to “mine,” “thy” to
“thine,” “ye” to “you,” “these” to those” or vice versa, I have dis-
regarded it. Where the word has been changed in form only, I have not
considered it as altered at all. Thus in the 84th Psalm King James has
“ a house wherein to rest.” Zachary Boyd altered this to “an house
wherein to rest,” and he is credited with the line by Dr. Rorison. As the
present Psalter contains some nine thousand lines, it will be seen that,
even if no more than these five hundred and seventy-two lines were taken
account of, the contribution of King James could not be considered
negligible, amounting as it does to about one line in every sixteen or
thereby. But in addition to these five hundred and seventy-two lines,
which are identical with those in our present Psalm book, there are over
fourteen hundred other lines which, though not exactly the same, are
markedly similar. Dr. Rorison takes notice of some of these, but only of
some. Where he found a line in our metrical psalms which was the same
as one say in Rous, Barton, Mure, or Boyd, all of whom could draw on
earlier versions, he took no notice (except occasionally) of the source,
unless the source was exactly the same. Thus he credits Barton with the
line, “ He shall be like a tree that grows ” (Ps. i), although both the
Reformation Psalter and James have the line, “ He shall be like a tree

1 Dr. Rorison gives the number of lines as 8,947, an impossible figure as the
number must be a multiple of four.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

193

that grow’th.” Where our present book has lines which are not the same
as any in earlier versions, but which are similar to some found there, he
indicated in some instances where such took their beginning. The follow-
ing lines, taken at random, will show how King James was used by suc-
ceeding versifiers.

Ps. 10, i8. “ May so oppress no more ” (King James).”

“ May them oppress no more ” (Westminster Revisers).

Ps. 40, 2. ‘‘He brought me from the horrid pit

and from entangling clay.” (King James.)

‘‘ He took me from a fearful pit

and from the miry clay.” (Francis Rous.)

Ps. 40. 18. “ Thou my deliverer art and help

my God no tarrying make.” (King James.)

“ Thou art my help and Saviour

my God no tarrying make.” (Zachary Boyd.)

Ps. 50. I. “ The mighty God the Lord hath said.” (King James.)

‘‘ The mighty God the Lord hath spoke.” (Bay Psalter.)*

In each case quoted, the second form is what appears in our present
psalter, and the persons, whose names are appended, are those to whom
the lines are credited by Dr. Rorison.

Occasionally however the Scottish Revisers have ‘‘improved” the
royal lines, even after others had tried their hands on them.

This in the 2nd Psalm we have the following sequences :

8. “ Ask me and thou for heritage ” (King James) ;

‘‘ Ask me and for thine heritage ” (Zachary Boyd) ;

“ Ask of me and for heritage ” (Present Psalter) ;
or in the 5th Psalm,

4. ‘‘ For thou art not a God who pleased ” (King James) ;

“ For thou art not a God that will ” (William Barton) ;

‘‘For thou art not a god that doth ” (Present Psalter).

We must not forget, however, when dealing with lines which appear in our
Psalter only slightly different from those in King James, that James too
drew to some extent on earlier versions, though so far as I have been able
to find out, he did not do so to anything like the extent that later writers
have drawn on him. All the lines quoted from the 1631 and 1636 editions
of his psalter are not necessarily ‘‘pure” James, though by far the
greater number are.

1 The Bay Psalter was the first book printed in America, being published there
in 1640 by the English Puritan colonists.

194

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

Of the fourteen hundred similar lines in our version and that of King
James, over six hundred differ in one word only. For example, the line
in the 24th Psalm, “ and who within His holy place,” is from the royal
book, but there the first word is “or” not “and.” The line in the 80th
Psalm, igth verse, “And so we shall be saved,” is from the 1631 edition ;
but there the last word is “ safe.” The well known words, “Worship the
Lord in the beauty of holiness,” are paraphrased in ours, “ In beauty of
his holiness” ; in King James, “ In beauty of true holiness.” In the
84th Psalm, the line in King James, “ that art my God and King ’’re-
appears in ours with “who” instead of “that.” We all know that verse
(19th) of the 34th Psalm, which runs ;

“ The troubles that afflict the just, in numbers many be J
But yet at length out of them all, the Lord doth set him free.”

It appears in exactly the same form in King James except that the word
“last” appears there instead of “length.”

Then, there are over 240 cases where the revisers have kept the words
which were in King James, but have altered their order. Thus, in the
42nd Psalm we have the lines,

“ I to God’s house did go with them, with voice of praise and joy.”

In ours, the last line has become “with voice of joy and praise,” the
alteration having been made by Francis Rous. In the 8th Psalm, King
James’ line, “ which were ordained by Thee,” has become in ours, “which
were by Thee ordained.” In the 26th Psalm, the line “ I have not sat
with persons vain ” has been turned to “ with persons vain I have not
sat ” ; not altogether an improvement. Even better known are the lines
from the 92nd Psalm, “ Unto the Lord to render thanks ; it is a comely
thing,” which have been altered in ours, “ To render thanks unto the
Lord, etc.” Sometimes one may get a little amusement from the change.
In the 4th Psalm, “ How long will ye 0 sons of men ” has been turned
into “ O ye the sons of men! how long.” In the 90th Psalm, the lines
“And let the beauty of the Lord, our God upon us be,” has had the order
of the last three words altered to “be us upon.”

Then we have over 500 lines in the 1650 Psalter where the similarity
to the older one, though less pronounced, is still evident. Take the first

1 When serving with the army “furth of Scotland” in the present war I was
surprised to hear an officer (the mess being predominantly English) repeat this line.
Looking round, wondering who the speaker was, I saw it was the Colonel. On asking
how he (a son of the vicarage) knew our metrical Psalms he replied, “Because I am
a son-in-law of the Manse.”

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

195

line of the 76th Psalm associated in covenanting story with Drumclog :*
“ In Judah’s land God is well known.” The line in James is not so good :
” In Judah God he is well known.” This appears in the 1631 book, and
in 1636 it was altered to, ” In Judah God is known, his name,” the second
line being given thus, “ In Israel is great,” suggesting the second line in
ours, “ his name’s in Isr’el great.” The last two lines in the 13th Psalm
in the later book read,

" Because he hath his bounty shown
to me abundantly.”

Who can doubt that these have been “lifted” from King James, though
neither of them is the same,

“ Because his bounty hath to me, abundantly been shown.”

In the 42nd Psalm King James’ line, “As with a sword within my
bones ” has become in ours, “ ’Tis as a sword within my bones.” There
is a change both in order and an alteration of one word, but the two lines
are substantially the same.

The older form of the 7th and 8th verses of the 29th Psalm is,

“The Lord’s voice parts the flames of fire, and doth the desert shake:
the wilderness of Kadesh oft to shake, the Lord doth make.”

The later one runs,

God’s voice divides the flames of fire,
the desert it doth shake.

The Lord doth make the wilderness,
of Kadesh all to shake.

There can be little doubt that the revisers, who gave us the latter, had
the former before them. The change in the first line from “Lord” to
“God” is not in accordance with the original.

Perhaps an ever better example of such minor changes is to be found
in the 75th Psalm, not so often sung now as in former days.

To Thee O God do we give thanks,
we do give thanks to Thee.

Because Thy wondrous works declare
thy great name near to be.

1 It may be safely affirmed that the story about the Covenanters singing this
Psalm to the tune of “ Martyrs,” as they advanced to the attack, is not true. The
nature of the ground they had to cross effectually prevented any singing. Sir Walter
Scott seems to have been the first to tell the tale and he has been followed by quite
a number of others. This Psalm was however sung at a great gathering of Covenanters
held at the Cross of Douglas, Lanarkshire, immediately after the Revolution of 1688.
Rev. Alexander Shields, who presided, mentioned that the same Psalm had been sung
at the Cross of Edinburgh ‘‘by famous Mr. Robert Bruce at the break of the Spanish
Armada.” Patrick Walker. Vindication of Cameron’s Name. In the Reformation
Psalter this Psalm is in lines of eight syllables, arranged in seven line stanzas.

196

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

In King James,

To Thee, O God we give due thanks
we give due thanks to Thee,
for that Thy wondrous works declare,
thy name most near to be.

The first verse of the 4th Psalm in our version runs thus.

Give ear unto me when I call,

God of my righteousness.

Have mercy, hear my prayer, thou hast
enlarged me in distress.

In King James,

Thou of my righteousness the God,
when as I call give ear ;
thou hast enlarged me from distress ;
my suit in mercy hear.

Not one line as it stands can be said to be the same as its neighbour in
the other book ; but a little examination shows that the first two lines in
King James have simply been rearranged to form the first two in ours.
The words of the third line of the old have been reproduced, but have
been divided between the third and fourth lines of the new. Another
instance of a similar change is to be found in the 91st Psalm, ist verse,
where King James’s “ In the Almighty’s shadow still, securely shall abide”
has become “ Under the shade of Him that is th’ Almighty shall abide.”
The first two lines of this verse it may be said are the same in both versions.

Sometimes too we find a line of the present embedded, so to speak, in
two lines of the older version. We all know the line from the 24th Psalm,
‘‘Whose hands are clean, whose heart is pure.” You will look for it in
vain in King James, but you will find the following,

“ Even he whose hands are clean, whose heart
is pure, who hath forborn.”

The following verses of well known Psalms illustrate the kind of changes
often made by the revisers. The 2nd verse of the 65th Psalm in King
James runs thus.

The man is blest, whom thou dost choose, *
and mak’st approach to Thee,
that he within thy holy courts,
a dweller stiU may be.

In ours, the first line has the same words, but in a different order. The

1 This line appears in the Scots Reformation Psalter ; but the other three lines
in the verse there, show no resemblance to those in King James.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

197

second line is exactly the same. The third line has “ thy courts O Lord ”
instead of “ thy holy courts.” The fourth line has the same words dif-
ferently arranged.

Or later the 84th Psalm,

Yea, even the Sparrow hath found out
a house wherein to rest.

The swallow also for herself
hath purchased a nest ;

Even at thine Altars, where she safe
her young ones forth may bring,

0 thou Almighty Lord of hosts,
that art my God and king.

In ours the first line is slightly different. The second has "an” instead
of “a.” The next two lines are the same. The fifth has, “ Even thine
own altars.” The sixth and seventh are the same. The eighth has “who”
instead of “that.”

Only in one Psalm, the 117th, which consists of eight lines, have I
failed to find any trace of the older version. In the 126th Psalm such
resemblances as there are may be accidental.*

No metrical psalm has been more often dissected than the 23rd ; and
I have noted that quite a number of the dissectors have failed to do
justice to King James. Thus a recent writer makes no reference whatever
to him, ascribing the line “ shall surely follow me ” to Rous, though it
appeared in the royal book years before Rous wrote. Another modern
writer ascribes the line, “within the paths of righteousness,” to the
Westminster Revisers. In King James the line runs, “ Into the paths of
righteousness,” the Scots “into” being used where other persons would
say “in.” The Westminster Revisers altered this to, “ on in the paths
of righteousness,” an alteration which has not an improvement. The
Scottish Revisers reverted to “into” and this is what appears in the edition
printed by Evan Tyler for the General Assembly in 1650. The line appears
to have been altered later. The line in King James, “And dost with oil
anoint my head,” was changed by Mure of Rowallan to “ With oil Thou
dost anoint my head,” and the Westminster Revisers put the line into its
present form.

1 There is something to be said for the view, that the 126th Psalm in our Psalter
■was written by Mr. John Nevay, who revised this section of the Psalter for the
General Assembly. The third verse in King James opens thus, “The Lord who only
mighty is, has done for us great things," the line in our version, “The Lord hath done
great things for us,” may have been taken from it. The last lines in ours, “He
doubtless b^ringing back his sheaves, rejoicing shall return,” may have been suggested
by the older lines of King James, “Rejoicing doubtless shall return, with sheaves to
serve his need.”

198

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

King James gave us,

Though through the vale of death’s dark shade
I walk, I fear no ill.

Thou art with me, thy rod and staff
afford me comfort still,

four lines which suggest a good deal in our version, and even more in
that of Zachary Boyd.

With regard to the peculiars, we cannot find that the revisers got
anything from King James except perhaps the words “fowler’s snare’’ in
the 124th Psalm. The Scottish Revisers made two alterations in the
hundredth Psalm. The original, written by William Kethe, began the
third verse with the words, “The Lord, ye know, is God indeed,” and
this is still used in England. The Revisers altered this to, “ Know that
the Lord is God indeed.” They may have got the first part of the line
from King James, whose version runs, “ Know that the Lord is our great
God.” The other change was the substitution of “mirth” for “fear” in
the second verse. Here King James has “ gladness,” as the prose has also.

There will be different opinions as to the value of the changes made
by the Revisers. Undoubtedly, there were many cases where these made
were for the better ; but there are others where in my view they were not.
Here is one of the latter sort taken almost at random, Psahn 31, 3.
Because Thou art my rock and thee
I for my fortress take.

Therefore do thou me lead and guide
ev’n for thine own name’s sake.

I prefer the older version.

For thou my rock and fortress art,
who me secure doth make ;

Lord, therefore lead and guide me still,
even for thine own name’s sake.

There are few finer stanzas in any metrical Psalter than the 25th and
26th verses of the i8th Psalm in King James ;

To him that is to mercy given
thou merciful wilt be;
and thou wilt upright be with him,
that upright is with thee.

Thou to the pure, to be most pure
wilt show thyself in love;
and thou with them that froward art
wilt likewise froward prove.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

199

Compare these lines with the corresponding ones in the present Psalter
and see what has been lost.

Thou gracious to the gracious art
to upright men upright,

Pure to the pure, froward thou kythst
unto the froward wight.

I have shown that much in our present Psalter has been taken from
King James and that is true of the book as a whole. But it is well known
that in most of our churches to-day only a small selection from the
Metrical Psalter is sung. Some of the Psalms are regarded as being quite
unsuitable for worship, while of others only a few verses are ever used.
Now, if what may be called the “ more singable ” psalms, those in general
use, are examined, it will be found that a very considerable number of
them come from the Psalter we are considering.

Here are a few specimens, chosen more or less at random.

Ps. 19. 7. The Lord his law converts the soul,

and perfect is always,
his testimony is most sure,
and makes the simple wise.

Ps. 20. 5. We will in thy salvation joy

in our God’s name we will
our banners boldly reare .

the Lord, all thy desires fulfil.

Ps. 25 (Short Metre).

1. To thee I lift my soule,

O Lord I trust in Thee,

2. my God let me not be asham’d ;

nor foes triumph o'er me.

3. Let none of them have shame,

who do on thee depend :
but who without a cause transgresse,
let shame on them attend.

Ps. 66. I. All lands with loud and joyful noise,
to God your voices raise :

2. sing forth the honour of his name,

and glorious make his praise.

3. Say unto God how terrible

in all thy works art thou ;
by thy great power, thy foes to thee
shall all be brought to bow.

200

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

Ps. 95. 5. To Him the spatious Sea belongs

and he the same did make;
yea, and the dry land from his hands
a form at first did take.

6. O come and let us worship straight,
and bow us downe withal,
and on our knees before the Lord
our maker let us fall.

Ps. 98. I. Sing to the Lord, a song new made,
he wondrous things hath done:
his right hand and his holy arme
him victory hath won.

2. The Lord hath his salvation made
to be most clearly knowne,
his righteousness in heathen’s sight,
he openly hath shown.

I have mentioned that the 121st and 122nd Psalms were in peculiar
metres in King James ; but in both cases there is “Another of the same.”

Psalm T2I.

I. I to these hills will lift mine eyes, whence cometh all mine ayde:
my help is from the Lord above, the heaven and earth that made.

It has been stated by some writers that our version of the 122nd Psalm
is by Mure of Rowallan. It undoubtedly owes something to him and
three of his lines are incorporated. King James supplies two, “ to Israels
testimony there” and “within thy walls remain.” A third is almost the
same, “prosperity contain,” which last word is nearer the original than
is the word “retain” of the present version.

From the laying aside of the Reformation Psalter in 1650 until the
introduction of Paraphrases in 1781, the Psalter was the sole medium of
congregational praise in the Church of Scotland and so occasions, which
to-day would be marked with specially chosen Paraphrases or Hymns,
had then to be marked by specially chosen Psalms, if they were marked
at aU. It is possible that till about the beginning of the i8th century
some attempt was made in certain places to mark the greater days of
the Christian Year by the use of such Psalms as the i6th at Easter, the
68th at Ascension, the 139th at Whitsunday and the 89th at Christmas ;
but the day came when, except in a few places, even such scanty recogni-

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

201

tion was denied. * It was, however, the custom in all branches of the

Scottish Church to mark sacramental occasions with special praise, and
this, it need hardly be said, has continued (so far as the Psalter is concerned)
to our own day.

In earlier days the last verses of the 144th Psalm were often sung in
Scottish churches after the Sacrament of Baptism had been administered.
This custom is still followed among those smaller parts of the Church in
Scotland, who decline to use “ human hymns.” Readers of the life of the
late Rev. J. P. Struthers of Greenock (Minister of the Reformed Presby-
terian Church there) may remember how more than once in his letters
he refers to this Psalm as being sung on such occasions. In our version
the 1 2th verse runs.

That as the plants our sons may be
in youth grown up that are.

Our daughters like to corner stones
carved^ like a palace fair.

There can be little doubt that these lines are from King James :

That like to plants our sons may be, in youth grown up that are,
our daughters as the comer stones, that grace a Pallace rare.

Another “baptismal” Psalm was the 128th, seldom sung now in the Church
of Scotland ; but still holding a place in the praises of some of the smaller
communions. Again we see the likeness of King James’s version to that
still in use.

(Present) Thy wife shall as a fruitful vine
by thy house’sides be found:

Thy children like to olive-plants
about thy table round.

1 Despite the prohibition by the First Book of Discipline of such “days” there is
no doubt that they continued to be noticed for years after the Reformation by minis-
ters who preferred the views of Calvin, who allowed such festivals, to those of Knox
who rejected them. In 1618, the General Assembly enjoined the observance of the
four “days” mentioned above, together with Good Friday. In 1638, this injunction
was declared “ null and void ” ; but existing records show that in spite of this and of
the prohibition of all “Holy Days” by the Westminster Directory, they continued to
be observed. During the Second Episcopacy there was no prohibition of such obser-
vance, and as many of the Episcopal ministers (except in the South West) remained
with their congregations, it may be taken that they continued to practise after the
Revolution what they had practised before it. Even Presbyterian stalwarts like
David Williamson (St. Cuthbert’s, Edinburgh) and Colonel Blackadder, who fought
at Dunkeld, kept Christmas as a festival. See Records of the Scottish Church History
Society, Vol. Ill, Part I. Also McMillan : Worship of the Scottish Reformed Church,
Chap. XXIV.

® The word “carved” is the equivalent of the Hebrew “Chatab” and is a better
translation than the word “polished” in the prose version.

202

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

( King James)

“ Thy wife shall as a fruitful vine, beside thy house be found,
thy children like to olive plants, about thy table round.”

This Psalm it may be noted is given as the marriage Psalm in the Book of
Common Order, the concluding rubric of that service reading, ‘‘Then is
sung the cxxviii Psalme, Blessed are they they that feare the Lord, &c.,
or some other apperteining to the same purpose.”^ Doubtless it was often
sung at such services for it was not until the middle of the i8th century
that the Church began to depart from its own rule that marriage should
be ‘‘in the place appointed by authority for Publick Worship,”^

Turning to the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper there is little doubt
that the use of the 43rd Psalm, as the opening praise on Communion
Sundays in Scotland, was derived from the corresponding use of this
Psalm in the Roman Mass.^ Now-a-days it is customary to begin at the
third verse, and the last two verses in King James version show the
source of ours :

4. Then will I to God’s Altar goe, to God my only joy :

yea and to praise thee, 0 my God, I will my harpe employ.

5. O why art thou (my soul) cast down, what doth disquiet thee :
hope thou in God, him yet I’ll praise, my God and good to me.

Another Psalm associated with the Roman Mass and Scots Communion
service is the 26th. In both cases it is sung from the 6th verse, but usually
in the latter case only three verses are sung while in the former it is sung
to the end. Here again King James contributes something to the form in
our present Psalter, for the 8th verse in his rendering runs thus :

“ The habitation of thy house, I, Lord, have loved well :
and of thy honour too, the place where it doth use to dwell.”

The ii6th Psalm, with its verse which declares, “I will take the cup of
salvation,” has been part of the Roman Mass from early days and its use
passed over into the Reformed Church. It is also found in the Book of
Deer (one of the few fragments left of the liturgical works of the Celtic

1 This is another instance of mediaeval usage being continued by the Reformed
Church. This Psalm was part of the Marriage Service in the Sarum Rite which was
used largely in Scotland before 1560. In 1549 the English Reformers introduced the
67th Psalm to the marriage service of the Book of Common Prayer as an alternative
to the 128th.

2 Westminster Directory.

3 It is not without significance that the tune to which this Psalm is usually sung
is called “Invocation.” It appears to have been written by R. A. Smith who pub-
lished it in 1825.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

203

Church in Scotland) as part of the Eucharistic Office.* King James has
not contributed much to our present version ; but the last verse as he
rendered it shows that he contributed something :

19. Amidst the Courts of his owne house, I will the same afford :
in midst of thee Jerusalem, all ye praise still the Lord.

No Psalm has been used more widely at the Scottish Communion
Service than the 103rd. In the Book of Common Order (Knox’s Liturgy)
the final rubric states, “ The action being ended, the people sing the
cm Psalme ‘My soule give laude, &c.’ or some other of thanksgiving.”
Despite the permission to use another, the 103rd has kept its place in our
traditional Communion order down to the present day. In the Roman
use, this Psalm forms part of the ” Votive Mass in time of War,” and as
such would probably be recited by the Abbot of Inchaffray, when he
celebrated before the Scottish host on the morning of Bannockburn.
Can there be any connection between these two uses ? Perhaps not, but
there is no doubt of the connection of King James version with that we
use to-day.

4. Who from destructione doth redeeme thy life when sinking down ;
who doth with loving kindness thee, and tender mercies crowne.

5. Who with the plenty of good things doth satisfie thy mouth ;
so that (even as the Eagles is), renued is thy youth.

Another Psalm associated with our Scottish Communion Service may
be noticed. This is the 24th, which was commonly sung by the congrega-
tion as the elders were bringing in the elements of bread and wine and
setting them on the Holy Table.2 The well known tune, ‘‘St. George’s,
Edinburgh” 3 was written for the last verses of this Psalm, and in many
churches was used at this point of the service. When the singing of
Paraphrases became general the 24th Psalm was displaced and the 35th
Paraphrase used instead. The custom then arose of singing ‘‘Ye gates
hft up your heads ” at the beginning of the thanksgiving service on
Communion Sunday evening, a somewhat unsuitable place for it. In somo
churches the opening verses of this Psalm are used as the first item of

1 It also appears in the Book of Dimma, the Book of Mulling and the Stowe
Missal, in each case being used after Communion. All three are formularies of the
Celtic Church.

2 This Scottish custom of carrying the Communion Elements into the Church
during the service has its counterpart in the Greek Church, but is quite unknown in
the Anglican and also in the Roman Church, except at Milan, where after a fashion
it still exists. At one time it appears to have been the regular custom throughout
Christendom.

^ It was witten by the Rev. Andrew Thomson, Minister of St. George’s Church,
Edinburgh, 1814-1831.

C

204

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

praise at the actual Communion Service as an alternative to the 43rd.
The first two verses in King James show how much our present Psalter is
indebted to his.

1. The earth belongs unto the Lord, and all that it containes :
the world that is inhabited, and all that there remaines.

2. For the foundation of the same, he on the Seas did lay
and also hath establish't it, upon the floudes to stay.

We may also refer to another example of the continuance of mediaeval
usage in post-Reformation days. Writing circa 1615 WiUiam Cowper,
Bishop of Galloway, states that ‘ ‘ it was the ancient custom of our Church
upon Sundays at afternoon to sing the 119th Psalm, which we think best
to be retained in use, by singing a section of the same before Sermon and
ane other after, and when it is ended, let the same be begun of new again.”
Nothing more suitable for use before and after Sermon than this Psalm
with its emphasis on the law of the Lord is to be found in the Psalter.*
The 119th Psalm was one of those which were fixed in the Roman Breviary
for use at Prime as well as at the three minor “ Hours,” Terce, Sext and
Nones. It is almost certain that it is this usage to which Cowper refers,
for “ancient” to him must have meant a period before 1565 in which year
he was born.

The present Psalter has drawn considerably on that of the King for
its version of the longest Psalm, as may be seen in the first verses of the
first and last portions.

King James)

I. Blest are all those, who undefiTd continue in the way,
who in the Lord’s most holy law, from walking never stray.

(Present)

I. Blessed are they that undefil’d, and straight are m the way
Who in the Lord’s most holy law do walk, and do not stray.

(King James)

169. O let the earnest cry I make, come near before thee. Lord,
and understanding grant to me, according to thy word.

(Present)

169. O let my earnest pray’r and cry come near before thee. Lord;
Give understanding unto me, according to thy word.

Such then is the Psalter of King James, which had much more influence
on the one presently in use in Scotland and beyond the seas than is gener-

1 Cowper wrote an exposition of this Psalm entitled “The Holy Alphabet of
Zion’s Scholars.’’ It was published at London in 1613.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

205

ally admitted. 1 We have still those who think that nothing good could
possibly have come from such a quarter, but the preceding pages have
shown, I think, that its mark is still easily recognised in the lines we sing.

Though I have spoken of this version as being the work of James I
and VI, I have done so only because the printed copies give his name as
that of the “ Translator.” There is no doubt whatever in my own mind
that while he had a hand in the versification, the greater part is from the
pen of another. James might be acclaimed as the ” Principal Mover and
Author of the work,” as he was calculated by the translators of the
Authorised Version of the Bible,^ though it has never been suggested that
he had any hand in the actual compiling of that great work. That it was
due to him that the Psalter was versified is undoubted ; but it is equally
true to say that his share in the actual work was not so great as that of
his colleague, the Earl of Stirling. ^

The ” Psalms of David translated by King James ” suffered and still
suffer from their association with that “ Most High and Mighty Prince.”
Had Alexander published the book as his own work, it would probably
have been more favourably received, though his companionship with the
King made him suspect with the anti-Prelatic faction. Had he been a
member of the Covenanting rather than the Court party, it is quite possible
that we might have been using his Psalter to-day for there is no doubt
that, whatever its defects may be, it marked an advance on those which
were being used both in Scotland and in England when it was first pub-
lished. As we have seen it was being used in some Scots congregations in
the “thirties” of the 17th century, although the imprimatur of the Church
had not been given to it.

Whatever may have been the abilities of King James as a poet, they
were superior, it seems to me, to those of Zachary Boyd, many of whose
lines appear in our present Psalter and much of whose work is simply
doggerel, and poor doggerel at that. Sir William Alexander, Earl of
Stirling, may not be in the first rank of Scottish poets ; but he is well ahead
of those who, up to his time, had tried their hand at versifying the Psalter.

1 In 1712 James Watson, who had been appointed a year earlier Queen’s printer
in Scotland, printed an octavo edition of the Book of Common Prayer at Edinburgh
“with the Psalms in Metre translated by King James the VI.” So far as is known,
this is the only instance of the royal Psalter being printed in Scotland.

* In the Dedication by the Translators.

3 Alexander Henderson, addressing his fellow Divines at the Westminster As-
sembly, said that he had seen the Psalter of “ Lord Stirling,” but preferred that of
Rous, though he thought the latter needed revision. Carruthers : The Everyday

Work of the Westminster Assembly, 115.

* As has been shown, there was a widespread feeling that the Reformation
Psalters had served their day and should be laid aside for something better.

206

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

He has been termed “ second to Drummond alone among Scottish renais-
sance poets,”' and it is believed by some that John Milton was willing
to learn from him. 2 A complete edition of his works, in two massive vol-
umes, was published by the Scottish Text Society in 1921 and 1929.
Strangely enough, the only reference to his work on the Psalms is given
in a footnote, in which it is said that ‘‘Although Sir William Alexander
took an active part in the translation of the Psalms, by King James . . .
his precise share in James's translation is too uncertain and complex to
warrant the ascription of any specific portion of the work to Sir WiUiam
Alexander.”^ This is much too hesitating. There can be no doubt that,
whatever share the King took in the work, the greater part was performed
by the Earl.

The attempt made by Charles to foist his father’s supposed Psalter
on the Scottish Church was a most ill-advised proceeding. The Church
was right in refusing to accept its manual of worship from any hands
except its own, even although the King showed more wisdom in submitting
the book to the judgment of at least some of the Presbyteries, in 1631,
than he did six years later, when he tried to force both Service Book and
Psalter on an unwilling people. There is little doubt that the Church
saw an attack on its liberties in this attempt to make its members accept a
Psalter in the preparation of which they had no part. ‘‘Few will deny,”
said the late Professor Cooper, speaking of the 1637 attempt, ‘‘that a tame
acquiescence in a proceeding so outrageous would have been equally fatal
to our civil liberties and to that authority in sacred things which the
Church has received from her Divine King.”

King James’s Psalter was rejected along with Laud’s Liturgy, and few,
if any, have since had much good to say of it.^ One recent writer teUs
us that it was “ entirely obnoxious ” to the people to whom it first came,
while another, also still with us, says, “ Its influence on our present
collection may be pronounced negligible.” The late Dr. Rankin, of
Muthil, declared that this new Psalter “was found so fantastic that even
the Bishops dropped it.” Such statements, and more could be quoted,

1 See Scottish Text Society Edition of his works, Vol. I, xii.

2 R. M. Ferguson : Alexander Hume. 148.

3 Vol. I, xiii. Baillie, writing in 1638. mentions the death of Lord Alexander
(son of the Earl of Stirling) , saying that he had lost a ‘ ‘ near coosin and familiar friend.”
He adds that the Earl himself was “ extreamly hated of all the countrie for . . .
his urgeing of the Psalmes and Books for them.” Many who intended the father’s
overthrow were ” witholden for respect of” the son. — Letters and Journals, i, 77.

* It may be noted that neither in Grub’s Ecclesiastical History of Scotland nor in
Stephen’s History of the Scottish Church, both of which are written from the stand-
point of the Episcopal Church, is any reference made to this Psalter; although it was
produced during the First Episcopacy.

THE METRICAL PSALTER OF KING JAMES VI

207

show simply that the writers have not taken the trouble to examine the
matter for themselves. “ It has been,” says Sir Walter Scott, ‘‘ the
bane of Scottish literature and the disgrace of her antiquities, that we have
manifested an eager propensity to believe without enquiry.” That has
certainly been the case, so far as this Psalter is concerned.

The Rev. Thomas Young, Minister of Ellon, writing in a volume in the
Guild Library, 1 of the rejection of the Service Book and Psalter, says,
‘‘ Perhaps the latter deserved a better fate.” Not very high praise, but
the best I have seen accorded to the work. Mr. Tough, who edited the
works of Sir WiUiam Mure of Rowallan.2 can say no more for Alexander’s
Psalter than that it was even less popular among the people than the
Reformation one.

Charles feU and this Psalter fell with him ; but as we have seen,
Alexander’s work has not perished without memorial ; for we still sing
the praises of the Almighty in words which were taken from the rejected
book, words which will be used so long as the Scottish Church remains
true to her Metrical Psalms.

I may be allowed to express the hope that the investigation I have
now made may help to a better and more sympathetic consideration of
this attempt to amend what was admittedly lacking in the praise of the
Scottish Sanctuary. We cannot forget that those who provided us with
our present psalter considered it to be capable of providing much of the
material to be used in the worship of God by the generations which were
to come.

On the second day of October, 1929, the historic union of the Scottish
Churches was carried through. After the (General Assemblies of the Church
of Scotland and the United Free Church of Scotland had each been consti-
tuted in its own place of meeting, the members walked in procession to
the High Kirk of Edinburgh (the Cathedral Church of St. Giles), there to
join in a service of thanksgiving to Almighty God. Probably there were
few in the whole gathering (if indeed there were any) who recognised in
the opening Psalm of praise a remnant of the book which in that same
church had been so ignominiously rejected (not to say ejected) in 1637,
when Jenny Geddes threw her stool at Dean Hanna. Yet so it was. The
first item of praise was the 147th Psalm, verses one to five, and words
were sung which were only slightly different from those in the Psalter of
King James.

1 The Metrical Psalms and Paraphrases. 27.

2 Scottish Text Society.

208

SCOTTISH CHURCH HISTORY SOCIETY

I. Praise ye the Lord, for it is good,
praise to our God to sing,
for it exceeding pleasant is,
praise is a comely thing.

5. Great is the Lord and of great power
his wisdom nought can bound. ^

A little later the same day the two General Assemblies met in joint-
session in the Hall of Assembly, Annandale Street, and after the Uniting
Act had been adopted, the members sang Psalm Ixxii, 18, 19. Here
again the words recalled the Royal Psalter :

Now blessed be the Lord our God, even Israel’s mighty God,
who only doth true wonders work, which are renowned abroad.

So the old book came into its own.

Additional Note. — In 1633, at the time of the visit of King Charles to
Edinburgh, a number of ministers took it upon themselves to interview
“ sundrie of the nobilitie, gentrie and burgesses ” (Members of Parliament)
in order that consideration might be given to certain proposals which it
was feared might have a bad effect on the Church. Among other reasons
for this action, which we may regard as the equivalent of the modern
“ lobbying,” was that it was believed that ” a new translation of the
Psalmes in Meeter was to be imposed,” and the nobility and others were
“ desired to consider that the Psalmes in Meeter, allowed by the Kirk of
Scotland and usually sung since the Reformation, cannot be altered by
inferior Assemblies of the Kirk or particular persons ; neither can it be
remitted or committed to Synods, Presbyteries or certain selected persons,
till there be a free General Assembly.”

It has again to be noted, that the objections had reference to the pro-
posed method of introducing the new Psalter and not to the Psalter itself.

Apologetic Narration of the State of the Kirk (Wodrow Society), by
William Scot (1558-1642), Minister of Cupar. 337.

> It should be said that this is one of the instances where King James has drawn
on the Reformation Psalter.